Rel ttm update material
Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2015 5:58 am
Hello,
[TTM] TTM and the Information Principle (was Re: [TTM] Definition of Relational Completeness)
Dave Voorhis <dave@armchair.mb.ca> JULY 25 wrote:
TYPE TypeInfo UNION;
TYPE Scalar IS {TypeInfo POSSREP {TypeName CHAR}};
TYPE TupleHeading IS {TypeInfo
POSSREP {Attributes RELATION {AttrName CHAR, AttrType TypeInfo}}};
TYPE RelationHeading IS {TypeInfo
POSSREP {Attributes RELATION {AttrName CHAR, AttrType TypeInfo}}};
Barring any significant objection, I will add the above to Rel, along with:
- A new built-in operator TYPE_OF(p) RETURNS TypeInfo, which returns a
TypeInfo for any expression p.
- A revised sys.Catalog catalog relvar, with the Attributes attribute changed from
type RELATION {Name CHAR, TypeName CHAR} to type RelationHeading.
Re: [TTM] Definition of Relational Completeness...
Dave Voorhis <dave@armchair.mb.ca>Jun 26 wrote:
A new type MATRIX that consists of n columns and an arbitrary number of rows.
A MATRIX type is declared as MATRIX [Type1 .. Typen], where each Type identifies
the column's type. E.g., MATRIX [INT, INT, CHAR] declares a matrix with an arbitrary
number of rows and three columns. The first two columns are of type INT, the last column
is of type CHAR.
My working hypothesis is that compared to relations, a MATRIX structure would
provide a more intuitive (and easier to make generic) basis for implementing
statistical and other analytical operators, like a generic 1-way ANOVA operator
or a generic autoregressive moving average, etc.
I'm very open to being convinced otherwise.
I look forward to using the former and sincerely hope you saw the need to facilitate
statistical computations with the latter. Such facilitation in the sql world is a "feature"
and helps sell the software. After price and performance comes "features". My working
hypothesis is the more constructs like MATRIX the better it is for Rel. I believe Rel needs
more actively involved users. Not those who are curious enough to download but are then
lost when DBrowser opens. A demo of MATRIX will make a greater impact on a ttm challenged
user than an example of the relational algebra. This is classical bait and switch. Bait with facilitation and then hope for the users switch to the algebra. And besides, as for statistics per se if I'm not mistaken Microsoft is trying to bake R into Sql Server obviating a users need to use t-sql or go to SAS or other statistical dedicated software.
On my use of italics. Apart from the other few ttm software developers I see very little interest in ttm project software on the ttm mailing list. An occasional acknowledgment or bug report but no real interest. Given the level of knowledge, sophistication and skill of the developer of Rel it is at least amusing that he shows such courtesy to his like-minded peers. There is a certain grace to that approach.
Question on the much anticipated Rel update: I'm assuming I can create a Rel relvar and
store it in, for example, sqlite. I would then have the opportunity for a mini ttm ecosystem.
I could have the option, if I so desired, of accessing that sqlite table in David Bennett's Andl,
modifying it (possibly) and then reacquiring the table in Rel. Is something like this going to be
possible?
thanks,
steve dassin
[TTM] TTM and the Information Principle (was Re: [TTM] Definition of Relational Completeness)
Dave Voorhis <dave@armchair.mb.ca> JULY 25 wrote:
TYPE TypeInfo UNION;
TYPE Scalar IS {TypeInfo POSSREP {TypeName CHAR}};
TYPE TupleHeading IS {TypeInfo
POSSREP {Attributes RELATION {AttrName CHAR, AttrType TypeInfo}}};
TYPE RelationHeading IS {TypeInfo
POSSREP {Attributes RELATION {AttrName CHAR, AttrType TypeInfo}}};
Barring any significant objection, I will add the above to Rel, along with:
- A new built-in operator TYPE_OF(p) RETURNS TypeInfo, which returns a
TypeInfo for any expression p.
- A revised sys.Catalog catalog relvar, with the Attributes attribute changed from
type RELATION {Name CHAR, TypeName CHAR} to type RelationHeading.
Re: [TTM] Definition of Relational Completeness...
Dave Voorhis <dave@armchair.mb.ca>Jun 26 wrote:
A new type MATRIX that consists of n columns and an arbitrary number of rows.
A MATRIX type is declared as MATRIX [Type1 .. Typen], where each Type identifies
the column's type. E.g., MATRIX [INT, INT, CHAR] declares a matrix with an arbitrary
number of rows and three columns. The first two columns are of type INT, the last column
is of type CHAR.
My working hypothesis is that compared to relations, a MATRIX structure would
provide a more intuitive (and easier to make generic) basis for implementing
statistical and other analytical operators, like a generic 1-way ANOVA operator
or a generic autoregressive moving average, etc.
I'm very open to being convinced otherwise.
I look forward to using the former and sincerely hope you saw the need to facilitate
statistical computations with the latter. Such facilitation in the sql world is a "feature"
and helps sell the software. After price and performance comes "features". My working
hypothesis is the more constructs like MATRIX the better it is for Rel. I believe Rel needs
more actively involved users. Not those who are curious enough to download but are then
lost when DBrowser opens. A demo of MATRIX will make a greater impact on a ttm challenged
user than an example of the relational algebra. This is classical bait and switch. Bait with facilitation and then hope for the users switch to the algebra. And besides, as for statistics per se if I'm not mistaken Microsoft is trying to bake R into Sql Server obviating a users need to use t-sql or go to SAS or other statistical dedicated software.
On my use of italics. Apart from the other few ttm software developers I see very little interest in ttm project software on the ttm mailing list. An occasional acknowledgment or bug report but no real interest. Given the level of knowledge, sophistication and skill of the developer of Rel it is at least amusing that he shows such courtesy to his like-minded peers. There is a certain grace to that approach.
Question on the much anticipated Rel update: I'm assuming I can create a Rel relvar and
store it in, for example, sqlite. I would then have the opportunity for a mini ttm ecosystem.
I could have the option, if I so desired, of accessing that sqlite table in David Bennett's Andl,
modifying it (possibly) and then reacquiring the table in Rel. Is something like this going to be
possible?
thanks,
steve dassin